Comey: No New Charges!

[seanD]

Well, once Congress gets the FBI report they've been covering up, that's when the real fireworks should begin. Unfortunately, Hillary will have already been sworn in by then. 2017 is going to be some chaotic year.

[Mountain Man]

Well, once Congress gets the FBI report they've been covering up, that's when the real fireworks should begin. Unfortunately, Hillary will have already been sworn in by then. 2017 is going to be some chaotic year.

This is assuming Congress -- including the Republicans -- isn't complicit in the cover-up. They've all but said they're willing to do whatever it takes to beat Trump. I'm hoping November 8 will be a day of reckoning, but at this point, I don't even know if our vote will make a difference or if Hillary will blatantly steal the election out from under our noses.

[seanD]

This is assuming Congress -- including the Republicans -- isn't complicit in the cover-up. They've all but said they're willing to do whatever it takes to beat Trump. I'm hoping November 8 will be a day of reckoning, but at this point, I don't even know if our vote will make a difference or if Hillary will blatantly steal the election out from under our noses.

I don't think Chaffetz is playing around, at least I hope. Which is why we really and sincerely need to pray for that dude.

[Bill the Cat]

I said it from the start. Comey will never recommend charges against Hillary, despite clearly articulating her guilt.

[Mountain Man]

Now the media has the perfect day-before-election pro-Hillary story, made to order by Comey and delivered gift-wrapped to their front door. Expect the next 24-hours to be wall-to-wall headlines proclaiming "Hillary Cleared By The FBI For A Second Time".

[Bill the Cat]

Now the media has the perfect day-before-election pro-Hillary story, made to order by Comey and delivered gift-wrapped to their front door. Except the next 24-hours to be wall to wall headlines proclaiming "Hillary Cleared By The FBI For A Second Time".

BINGO! Ready.made drama to make her palatable...

[One Bad Pig]

BINGO! Ready.made drama to make her palatable...

There is nothing that could possibly make that poop sandwich palatable. There is the remote possibility that it could taste better than the Trump sandwich. It's a low bar, but so far Hillary is nowhere close to clearing it.

[Mountain Man]

So here's a wild conspiracy theory I read:

If Hillary loses, the Democrats will challenge the results based on the FBI investigation, claiming that for one week of early voting, voting was suppressed because Hillary supporters thought she was going to be indicted.

Honestly, I wouldn't put it past them. Washington wants Hillary to win by hook or by crook.

[seanD]

Now the media has the perfect day-before-election pro-Hillary story, made to order by Comey and delivered gift-wrapped to their front door. Expect the next 24-hours to be wall-to-wall headlines proclaiming "Hillary Cleared By The FBI For A Second Time".

I fear that that's also going to be used as ammunition against further congressional investigation. I would imagine that the MSM is going to pull out all the stops to attack and smear Chaffetz as a partisan hack for continuing the investigation in spite of the FBI and DOJ, which he claimed he would do even after election. That's the best case scenario. I don't want to think about the worse case scenario, and we all know what that is. The question is whether other Reps back him up or throw him under the bus.

[Terraceth]

Besides, are we really to believe that they went through all 650,000 emails in such a short amount of time?

Apparently a lot of the e-mails were just copies of the previous ones. You can use a computer to find all the duplicates, which could reduce the workload dramatically and leave far fewer e-mails that need to be manually looked at.

Honestly though, I don't think there's a conspiracy here. They looked at the e-mails, didn't find anything more incriminating than they had before. However incorrect someone may think the original decision not to indict Hillary was, if there's not anything extra to substantiate an indict, the original decision stands.

[Jaecp]

Apparently a lot of the e-mails were just copies of the previous ones. You can use a computer to find all the duplicates, which could reduce the workload dramatically and leave far fewer e-mails that need to be manually looked at.

Honestly though, I don't think there's a conspiracy here. They looked at the e-mails, didn't find anything more incriminating than they had before. However incorrect someone may think the original decision not to indict Hillary was, if there's not anything extra to substantiate an indict, the original decision stands.

The bigger issue is that they announced this a week before an election before they had any way to know if the emails mattered in the slightest. Comey might have violated the Hatch act here. This should never have been news until they actually found something. There's a reason its SOP to not talk about investigations until they've been completed.

[seanD]

Apparently a lot of the e-mails were just copies of the previous ones. You can use a computer to find all the duplicates, which could reduce the workload dramatically and leave far fewer e-mails that need to be manually looked at.

Honestly though, I don't think there's a conspiracy here. They looked at the e-mails, didn't find anything more incriminating than they had before. However incorrect someone may think the original decision not to indict Hillary was, if there's not anything extra to substantiate an indict, the original decision stands.

What would be the reason to go against protocol, announce to Congress you found a batch of new emails not knowing what the emails even contain, take heat from the public, the DOJ, and even Obama for doing it, then close the case a week later? It doesn't make sense. If you argue Comey was being political and trying to help Trump, this obviously backfired since he exonerated her before election. Arguing he announced it to initially help Hillary doesn't make sense either because he initially exonerated her the first time, thus taking all this heat was unnecessary. It doesn't make any sense as not a conspiracy lol.

[robrecht]

What would be the reason to go against protocol, announce to Congress you found a batch of new emails not knowing what the emails even contain, take heat from the public, the DOJ, and even Obama for doing it, then close the case a week later? It doesn't make sense. If you argue Comey was being political and trying to help Trump, this obviously backfired since he exonerated her before election. Arguing he announced it to initially help Hillary doesn't make sense either because he initially exonerated her the first time, thus taking all this heat was unnecessary. It doesn't make any sense as not a conspiracy lol.

[seanD]

It was in direct conflict with the policies of the DOJ, of whom he answers to. You announce further developments to Congress when you find something substantive in the emails and then take the heat for it when it's necessary to do so, not when you have no way of knowing the content of the emails beforehand. They also knew about the emails weeks prior, which makes announcing it a week before election all that more odd. Also, the fact Congress had to initiate a subpoena to get the FBI report of the investigation they refused to turn over on request directly contradicts any obligation you feel he had to Congress. In order to explain it away, you have to dismiss too many details involved in the circumstances.

[robrecht]

It was in direct conflict with the policies of the DOJ, of whom he answers to. You announce further developments to Congress when you find something substantive in the emails and then take the heat for it when it's necessary to do so, not when you have no way of knowing the content of the emails beforehand. They also knew about the emails weeks prior, which makes announcing it a week before election all that more odd. Also, the fact Congress had to initiate a subpoena to get the FBI report of the investigation they refused to turn over on request directly contradicts any obligation you feel he had to Congress. In order to explain it away, you have to dismiss too many details involved in the circumstances.

None of this seems all that surprising to me. What exactly is the conspiracy theory you are proposing here?